ProfD

I looked at two forum posts concerning whoopi goldberg and none focused on the point, what did WHoopie Goldberg say and was it the truth

What did WHoopie Goldberg say, I paraphrase close to a quote: "Why are they upset over nudity more than the holocaust...Well, this is White people doing it to White people, so y'all gonna fight amongst yourselves,...If you're going to do this, then let's be truthful about it because the Holocaust isn't about race....man's inhumanity to man...its about two White groups of people... your missing the point, it's about how people treat each other... if your worried about Maus, they are not going to say it is about me, they are going to say, I don't want to be like that"

So, what were Whoopie's points?

1)The people who want to ban MAus's book are more interested in nudity than the violence between human beings?
2)THe violence between human beings in Maus book is more of an issue than the nudity
3)The actions of the National socialist party of germany concerning the holocaust or in general within germany was about white people to white people.
4)White people fight amongst themselves
5)The holocaust isn't about race
6)The holocaust is about man's inhumanity to man
7)The holocaust is about two groups of white people
8)Children reading the book will not ponder about the inter human violence, they will not want to be the abused. 

What is the truth in each point?
1) Truth, the people banning "Maus" are stating the primary reason is nudity, in a modern media where nudity is rampant. Either they are lying , and they want to ban a book that speaks on the holocaust or racial issues, or they are fanatic about an issue, nudity in public, that in the modern USA is near impossible to fight off.
2) False, neither is an issue. Books , like all forms of art, are not obliged to many anyone comfortable but the writer and the reader who wishes to or continues to read.
3) Truth, most of the people in germany are white, regardless of their religious race. Sequentially, this is an issue within the phenotypical race commonly called white.
4) Truth, the Nazi party of the USA was as emboldened to follow Hitler as any other Nazi party throughout the world.
5) False, the holocause is about religious race. It isn't about phenotypical race. White jews are jews, while also white. A White christian in germany can say a white jew is not german, as german is a label for three seperate races. A geographic/cultural/linguistic race. 
6) False, All of war is about human negativity towards other humans but not inhumanity. Cruelty/savagery/slavery are negative things but not inhuman things. When a male lion defeats another male lion and kills a cub of the defeated lion, that is not an inlion act. Nor does it mean the victorious lion is a sinner or evil. The point of power is to be powerful. To continue your line while the others end. The goal of the NAzi's concerning their murder sprees was erasing those not deemed appropriate for Nazi german, by there standards,  who lived in Nazi Germany. They wanted a germany free of jews/romani/midgets. The USA itself had many an eugenics program. The goal is to kill some bloodline and continue others. It isn't inhuman but it is very negative for those whose bloodlines are at risk.
7) Truth, the white jew in germany side the white nazi , comprehend that white jews existed in nazi germany as collaborators. Sequentially, even the Nazi party of germany thought white jews had a positive function that was worth not killing them.
Truth, the role of parents is to guide children. In the USA most parents guide children to not be the abused. It isn't about character, it is about power. Be the slave master, not the slave. The slave master may be disliked but the slavemaster is free, the slavemaster controls their life. 

In conclusion, I see five true points and three false points in Whoopie's statements. An employer has the right to suspend or fire an employee , if the contract doesn't protect the employee, based on their literature. Freedom of speech for most jobs in the usa historically doesn't protect the laborer from the firm's negative appraisals. 
All the talk about the person of whoopie goldberg or the potency of the white jewish community is invalid to the issue. 

Read an article concerning book banning from an authors lips
https://aalbc.com/tc/profile/6477-richardmurray/?status=1757&type=status

FORUM POST- to read views

https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/8512-whoopi-goldberg-suspension/

https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/8533-whoopi-goldbergs-liberal-jewish-paymasters-just-recently-put-her-and-all-of-black-hollywood-in-their-places-ie-to-be-nothing-more-than-doormats-for-the-real-power-brokers/

In reply to 

@ProfD   Your hope in reply  lead to a great topic, at least to me. The topic is the purpose of educational institutions in the english colonies to 2022 in the usa. 
You have three avenues.

White european

Indigenous

Black 

White european mass education < meaning schools> was originally for religious teaching. Apprenticeship , was the primary tool for education in the crafts or philosophical arts. The first colleges in the usa had one function, that they all still maintain today, a place where rich white male children can come together and make alliances for the future. ... now going through time, white women gained colleges but they were designed to prepare for wifedom, not working or owning anything. Classes on homelife dominated those schools originally. ... later on whites like woodrow wilson gave the college of new jersey their first academic requirements, which was viewed as radical at that time. That time being the late 1800s early 1900s so.then after world war two, the statian empire through the leadership of FD Roosevelt, made the gi bill so all the male soldiers just finished killing for the empire, were preoccupied with school and financial stipends, not poverty and thoughts of money making through arms. That led to the modern idea of the education system being about self improvement and a way to  create a peaceful or positive multiracial society. 

Indigenous mass education was originally,  absent any native american or indigenous input , meant to eliminate the culture of the native american in the remaining survivors of the native american community. As one navajo poet said, most native american poets don't write in their native tongue, which their traditional culture will allow but , they don't know their traditional culture, and the reason is the schools whites owned , controlled, used to do said purpose. Now in the 1950s, note the time between the first white invading immigrants and the 1950s, native american communities rallied against these institutions, with varying levels of success. I think the last of those schools existed in the 1990s. But, Native americans today, absent money, absent power, absent knowledge are trying to relearn their own culture. A very hard thing to do when everything is against your community. Cause the damage in the past wasn't little. 

Black mass or individual education was banned legally or culturally within the usa or the european colonies that preceded it holistically, until the end of the war between the states. Now the Historical Black Colleges and Universities, most of whom were financed by white religious organizations , had two purposes. Religious indoctrination plus craft teaching. The three key leaders to HBCU's in my view is frederick douglass/booker t washington/web dubois. Each black male had four things in common : each was black, male, had positive relations on a personal level with financially wealthy whites, had a strong belief in the ability of education to empower. To the issue here that last point is massive. The HBCU's eventually taught more than physical crafts and started teaching law or chemistry. But, the black leadership of the day, those three men I spoke of, had an idea that black people absent ownership could educate our way into some positive situation. Over time,the white religious groups stopped funding the schools and many fell. But those who survived have within each of them a similar community of black students, like the white students that originally inhabited in majority and still inhabt in minority, the ivy league schools. A black one percent. 

Now what does this have to do with HBCU's getting more membership, or the role of affirmative action in the educational system? 

The problem is the initial role of educational systems, and how they haven't functionally changed from their original premise. 

I am from NYC, Harlem in particular, I know COlombia University very well. I can tell you with certainty that most whites know colombia is a place to connect to the money. Yeah, they want to learn or study. But, the role of colleges is to connect to the money.
Native americans exist in NY state, the cloest tribe is on the tip of long island, a place called montauk. But it isn't like their language or culture is taught in schools. 
And I will not speak for any of you... but, I persoanlly know a ton of black matriculated people older than me, my generation, younger than me. Civil engineers/chemical engineers/electrical engineers/physicists/mathemeticians yes... and not just recent immegres from jamaica or nigeria, yes, DOSers, that is right , people descended from black people enslaved in the usa. As a teenager, I knew of black kids in bronx science/brooklyn tech/styvesant, as well as in brandeis... educationally, I don't see anything wrong with the black community. But, the issue isn't education. It isn't even entry. Like myself most black people in NYC didn't get affirmative action to go to school. The issue is the role of the educational system to opportunity.  The historical black colleges were not for collections of fiscally wealthy blacks cause too few , I realize when I use absolute words in this forum somebody has to comment I am wrong for being absolute in my words, fiscally wealthy blacks existed. Now today a fiscal black elite exists but they haven't done their part. 

Before I go into their part, my closing point on education education systems in the usa is, they are not for education. They either serve as gated communities for fiscally wealthy children to keep the money tight/are cultural weapons to annihilate or diminish non white or non white european culture/ or they are for religious cultural teachings that don't respect the fiscal capitalistic reality of the usa. And that is ownership is key, not labor. IF you own, you are the slavemaster. Everybody else is either a slave/overseer/crafts person but everybody else works for you, and at your behest, not cause any from everybody else merits it. It is cause you the owner want them.

Now, to the black fiscal elite. 
I don't know how many black people were paid to go to school by a relative who was a financially successful singers/thespians/athlete... but I am 99% certain that said relatives didn't send 90% of their kin to HBCUs. 
So, before the fiscally poor black children are asked to go to HBCU's 99% of the fiscally wealthy or attached to fiscally wealthy black children need to go to HBCU's first. 

And that also provides that investment that is badly needed. 
 

In reply to 

@ProfD   Your hope in reply  lead to a great topic, at least to me. The topic is the purpose of educational institutions in the english colonies to 2022 in the usa. 
You have three avenues.

White european

Indigenous

Black 

White european mass education < meaning schools> was originally for religious teaching. Apprenticeship , was the primary tool for education in the crafts or philosophical arts. The first colleges in the usa had one function, that they all still maintain today, a place where rich white male children can come together and make alliances for the future. ... now going through time, white women gained colleges but they were designed to prepare for wifedom, not working or owning anything. Classes on homelife dominated those schools originally. ... later on whites like woodrow wilson gave the college of new jersey their first academic requirements, which was viewed as radical at that time. That time being the late 1800s early 1900s so.then after world war two, the statian empire through the leadership of FD Roosevelt, made the gi bill so all the male soldiers just finished killing for the empire, were preoccupied with school and financial stipends, not poverty and thoughts of money making through arms. That led to the modern idea of the education system being about self improvement and a way to  create a peaceful or positive multiracial society. 

Indigenous mass education was originally,  absent any native american or indigenous input , meant to eliminate the culture of the native american in the remaining survivors of the native american community. As one navajo poet said, most native american poets don't write in their native tongue, which their traditional culture will allow but , they don't know their traditional culture, and the reason is the schools whites owned , controlled, used to do said purpose. Now in the 1950s, note the time between the first white invading immigrants and the 1950s, native american communities rallied against these institutions, with varying levels of success. I think the last of those schools existed in the 1990s. But, Native americans today, absent money, absent power, absent knowledge are trying to relearn their own culture. A very hard thing to do when everything is against your community. Cause the damage in the past wasn't little. 

Black mass or individual education was banned legally or culturally within the usa or the european colonies that preceded it holistically, until the end of the war between the states. Now the Historical Black Colleges and Universities, most of whom were financed by white religious organizations , had two purposes. Religious indoctrination plus craft teaching. The three key leaders to HBCU's in my view is frederick douglass/booker t washington/web dubois. Each black male had four things in common : each was black, male, had positive relations on a personal level with financially wealthy whites, had a strong belief in the ability of education to empower. To the issue here that last point is massive. The HBCU's eventually taught more than physical crafts and started teaching law or chemistry. But, the black leadership of the day, those three men I spoke of, had an idea that black people absent ownership could educate our way into some positive situation. Over time,the white religious groups stopped funding the schools and many fell. But those who survived have within each of them a similar community of black students, like the white students that originally inhabited in majority and still inhabt in minority, the ivy league schools. A black one percent. 

Now what does this have to do with HBCU's getting more membership, or the role of affirmative action in the educational system? 

The problem is the initial role of educational systems, and how they haven't functionally changed from their original premise. 

I am from NYC, Harlem in particular, I know COlombia University very well. I can tell you with certainty that most whites know colombia is a place to connect to the money. Yeah, they want to learn or study. But, the role of colleges is to connect to the money.
Native americans exist in NY state, the cloest tribe is on the tip of long island, a place called montauk. But it isn't like their language or culture is taught in schools. 
And I will not speak for any of you... but, I persoanlly know a ton of black matriculated people older than me, my generation, younger than me. Civil engineers/chemical engineers/electrical engineers/physicists/mathemeticians yes... and not just recent immegres from jamaica or nigeria, yes, DOSers, that is right , people descended from black people enslaved in the usa. As a teenager, I knew of black kids in bronx science/brooklyn tech/styvesant, as well as in brandeis... educationally, I don't see anything wrong with the black community. But, the issue isn't education. It isn't even entry. Like myself most black people in NYC didn't get affirmative action to go to school. The issue is the role of the educational system to opportunity.  The historical black colleges were not for collections of fiscally wealthy blacks cause too few , I realize when I use absolute words in this forum somebody has to comment I am wrong for being absolute in my words, fiscally wealthy blacks existed. Now today a fiscal black elite exists but they haven't done their part. 

Before I go into their part, my closing point on education education systems in the usa is, they are not for education. They either serve as gated communities for fiscally wealthy children to keep the money tight/are cultural weapons to annihilate or diminish non white or non white european culture/ or they are for religious cultural teachings that don't respect the fiscal capitalistic reality of the usa. And that is ownership is key, not labor. IF you own, you are the slavemaster. Everybody else is either a slave/overseer/crafts person but everybody else works for you, and at your behest, not cause any from everybody else merits it. It is cause you the owner want them.

Now, to the black fiscal elite. 
I don't know how many black people were paid to go to school by a relative who was a financially successful singers/thespians/athlete... but I am 99% certain that said relatives didn't send 90% of their kin to HBCUs. 
So, before the fiscally poor black children are asked to go to HBCU's 99% of the fiscally wealthy or attached to fiscally wealthy black children need to go to HBCU's first. 

And that also provides that investment that is badly needed.